I know I criticise them, sometimes a lot. But this is a new company doing it's first MMO so I do cut them some slack. Bottom line, when it's your first time it tends to get a bit messy. At least CR is out trying to make a dream come true, something I should do more of.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
You're twisting this, they did not guarantee Star Marine on 2.6 over announcing that it was planned for it, part of 2.6's scope. It's the planned feature-set for that update.
It is on the current, it was on 2.6's report: "Tasks that delay beyond our target dates might cause the release of 2.6 to be delayed, or might be excluded from 2.6 if appropriate to maintain the release date target."
No Max I am not twisting anything. I am simply saying they should be held accountable to what they say and that they shouldn't say things unless they can actually deliver them. It would be far healthier for the project.
You are the one focusing on Star Marine and using "it was planned, it was part of the scope" as justification for 3.0 having a completely contrived ETA and remaining MIA with finalisation plans not even set 3 1/2 months after it was announced.
I know I criticise them, sometimes a lot. But this is a new company doing it's first MMO so I do cut them some slack. Bottom line, when it's your first time it tends to get a bit messy. At least CR is out trying to make a dream come true, something I should do more of.
Were they not industry veterans I would fully agree. If this was a one off or even the occasional mishap I would fully agree but it's gone way beyond that.
No Max I am not twisting anything. I am simply saying they should be held accountable to what they say and that they shouldn't say things unless they can actually deliver them. It would be far healthier for the project.
You twisted by implying that I was defending CR's release dates, when all I was on about was the planned features and the implications that exist there on the delivery on X update.
The disclaimer must be there, without it, if they say X feature is planned for X update and when it gets to it the feature is delayed, peeps around will just scream around "LIARS, LIARS! FILTHY LIARS!!!"
With the disclaimer, this is now pretty clear: These are the planned features, these are the current estimates for their delivery, and here it is the disclaimer that features might delay the whole release and even be cut out of it.
My point is simply that this needs to be considered when setting up expectations for these things. The sooner 3.0 gets on the under the public production schedule the better.
I know I criticise them, sometimes a lot. But this is a new company doing it's first MMO so I do cut them some slack. Bottom line, when it's your first time it tends to get a bit messy. At least CR is out trying to make a dream come true, something I should do more of.
Were they not industry veterans I would fully agree. If this was a one off or even the occasional mishap I would fully agree but it's gone way beyond that.
Imho, regardless if your an industry vet or not, when you step into a realm you haven't done before, shit will most likely will hit the fan several times. I could be the best classical composer, but If someone told me to write a RnB track, I'm going to cock it up a few times. Also take into account they're not creating the average MMO, so it close to them trying to write an RnB track that could potential redefine the genre. Think it's fair to say you're going to run into a lot more problems than usual.
I would say the mishaps are occasional, the only reason it might not seem so is due to people over reacting or magnifying an issue or even creating ones out of thin air. Not denying there are issues, just some tend to focus on non-issues, that's why we have SC dicussions that most of the time go absolutely no where.
Well announcing 3.0 was for marketing only purposes they needed it to sell their concepts. The backers were ready to forgive the star marine debacle. But with 3.0 they broke the camels back for many supporters; this strategy did no good to the project, repeating this will make things only worse.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
If they stopped making fake 'gameplay' videos and running video blogs and just made HALF the shit they promised 3 years ago they might get some good will back.
But its business as usual at CiG, do the summer/fall convention tour show some movies they produced in their studio and try to pass them off as gameplay. Have CR mumble and fumble around the stage for 30 minutes close with a sales pitch and special jpeg offering.
Anyone that thinks they will get SQ 42 AND 3.0 (in any form) out in the same year are dreaming. But then again the backers of this game have been in dreamland for a few years now.
I know I criticise them, sometimes a lot. But this is a new company doing it's first MMO so I do cut them some slack. Bottom line, when it's your first time it tends to get a bit messy. At least CR is out trying to make a dream come true, something I should do more of.
Not just it's first MMO but one could say they are going for one of the most ambitious games ever attempted. I'd say "cut them some slack" is the least gamers should do. Don't forget that anyone that bought a basic package (as low as $20/$35 at some time and currently @ $55/$60) gets all the stuff they have been working at, releasing early and adding bit by bit would mean that most likely we would have to pay $45 for Space Ships, 45$ for FPS Combat, 45$ for Planetary Landings, 45$ for Build Bases etc etc..
If you release a bunch of slides 2 months before an ETA most people would not expect that list to change too dramatically. In fact it would be perfectly reasonable to believe they have been in code freeze for quite some time and are working through bug testing. <snip>
If the finished game was launching in 2 months absolutely.
On an on-going alpha - no.
Against a backdrop of regular update hopefully means ... hopefully. And hopefully with feature x means ... hopefully with feature x.
So feature x not making it into 3 - no big deal. They are using a mix of hard targets - things that 3.0 (for example) will have and soft targets - things that will make it into 3.0 if they are ready.
Now if feature x has still not made it at "some point in the future" that suggests something is off. As it stands however - I'm pretty sure - that all the features they have said are "coming soon" have indeed arrived.
Which at the end of the day is what you would expect. They have no need to announced feature x if its not "nearly ready"; hard to imagine anyone backing the game on the basis of a few additional features "coming soon". And - crucially - the alpha is a double edged sword. If they announce it and don't deliver in a reasonable period there will be those who will call them out on it.
As it stands though trying to call them out because they said "hopefully" - that is grasping at straws.
releasing early and adding bit by bit would mean that most likely we would have to pay $45 for Space Ships, 45$ for FPS Combat, 45$ for Planetary Landings, 45$ for Build Bases etc etc..
Kinda like what Elite:Dangerous is doing.
I agree that is pretty shitty.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
I know I criticise them, sometimes a lot. But this is a new company doing it's first MMO so I do cut them some slack. Bottom line, when it's your first time it tends to get a bit messy. At least CR is out trying to make a dream come true, something I should do more of.
Were they not industry veterans I would fully agree. If this was a one off or even the occasional mishap I would fully agree but it's gone way beyond that.
Veterans of RPG's but not MMO's. Whole different animal which is probably what causes some of the problems. CR may be trying to make an MMO like it's a bundle of RPG's. He probably doesn't follow the advice of his staff who do have experience in MMO's.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Octagon7711 said: He probably doesn't follow the advice of his staff who do have experience in MMO's.
I'd agree. Likely the advice would be most about the stuff he can't do, we see SC and we see big focus on things MMO's usually do not focus, or are cut from them purposely due the technical challenge it represents to do within an online enviornment.
This goes back to: "It was never done before because it can't be done."
But on the present reality especially within technology I can't agree it can't be done, it requires is developers who are willing to take the risks to pull it off, and CIG is getting there by trial and error.
Comments
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
No Max I am not twisting anything. I am simply saying they should be held accountable to what they say and that they shouldn't say things unless they can actually deliver them. It would be far healthier for the project.
You are the one focusing on Star Marine and using "it was planned, it was part of the scope" as justification for 3.0 having a completely contrived ETA and remaining MIA with finalisation plans not even set 3 1/2 months after it was announced.
Were they not industry veterans I would fully agree. If this was a one off or even the occasional mishap I would fully agree but it's gone way beyond that.
The disclaimer must be there, without it, if they say X feature is planned for X update and when it gets to it the feature is delayed, peeps around will just scream around "LIARS, LIARS! FILTHY LIARS!!!"
With the disclaimer, this is now pretty clear: These are the planned features, these are the current estimates for their delivery, and here it is the disclaimer that features might delay the whole release and even be cut out of it.
My point is simply that this needs to be considered when setting up expectations for these things. The sooner 3.0 gets on the under the public production schedule the better.
so it close to them trying to write an RnB track that could potential redefine the genre. Think it's fair to say you're going to run into a lot more problems than usual.
I would say the mishaps are occasional, the only reason it might not seem so is due to people over reacting or magnifying an issue or even creating ones out of thin air. Not denying there are issues, just some tend to focus on non-issues, that's why we have SC dicussions that most of the time go absolutely no where.
The backers were ready to forgive the star marine debacle.
But with 3.0 they broke the camels back for many supporters; this strategy did no good to the project, repeating this will make things only worse.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
Except there is no indication for the "many" you speak about. To the contrary.
A few people want a refund. But when one speaks of many hundredthousands of backers, thats only a tiny portion of the backers.
Have fun
But its business as usual at CiG, do the summer/fall convention tour show some movies they produced in their studio and try to pass them off as gameplay. Have CR mumble and fumble around the stage for 30 minutes close with a sales pitch and special jpeg offering.
Anyone that thinks they will get SQ 42 AND 3.0 (in any form) out in the same year are dreaming. But then again the backers of this game have been in dreamland for a few years now.
And w.r.t. video blogs ... may I remind you that subscribers want these video blogs and give CIG money voluntarily to create them!
Have fun
On an on-going alpha - no.
Against a backdrop of regular update hopefully means ... hopefully. And hopefully with feature x means ... hopefully with feature x.
So feature x not making it into 3 - no big deal. They are using a mix of hard targets - things that 3.0 (for example) will have and soft targets - things that will make it into 3.0 if they are ready.
Now if feature x has still not made it at "some point in the future" that suggests something is off. As it stands however - I'm pretty sure - that all the features they have said are "coming soon" have indeed arrived.
Which at the end of the day is what you would expect. They have no need to announced feature x if its not "nearly ready"; hard to imagine anyone backing the game on the basis of a few additional features "coming soon". And - crucially - the alpha is a double edged sword. If they announce it and don't deliver in a reasonable period there will be those who will call them out on it.
As it stands though trying to call them out because they said "hopefully" - that is grasping at straws.
I agree that is pretty shitty.
Bartoni's Law definition: As an Internet discussion grows volatile, the probability of a comparison involving Donald Trump approaches 1.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
This goes back to: "It was never done before because it can't be done."
But on the present reality especially within technology I can't agree it can't be done, it requires is developers who are willing to take the risks to pull it off, and CIG is getting there by trial and error.